Welcome to DBSTalk

Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!

Actually, there is some sense in technical stand point: to test/check whole path from a point of receiving source signal to earth stations (our DVR/receivers). Just use duplicated channels from same station/provider and you will have pretty good test case.

So was D12 tp 9 and 10 there for awhile but you figured out a new way to detect them... Or did they actually just recently show up?

It was thought that they carried nothing before right? That is unless whatever it carried was coded in a way your script did not detect.
Maybe they are using them to test different (and existing) channels in a 6:1 compressed multiplex with new encoders. Once they find the secret formula for what combination of content that works well together in 6:1, they migrate those live channels to that configuration.

So was D12 tp 9 and 10 there for awhile but you figured out a new way to detect them... Or did they actually just recently show up?

It was thought that they carried nothing before right? That is unless whatever it carried was coded in a way your script did not detect.Maybe they are using them to test different (and existing) channels in a 6:1 compressed multiplex with new encoders. Once they find the secret formula for what combination of content that works well together in 6:1, they migrate those live channels to that configuration.

So was D12 tp 9 and 10 there for awhile but you figured out a new way to detect them... Or did they actually just recently show up?

It was thought that they carried nothing before right? That is unless whatever it carried was coded in a way your script did not detect.Maybe they are using them to test different (and existing) channels in a 6:1 compressed multiplex with new encoders. Once they find the secret formula for what combination of content that works well together in 6:1, they migrate those live channels to that configuration.

Prior to this week, there was nothing in the normal guide data for D12 transponders 9 & 10.

Nothing in the gct spreadsheet and nothing that I could see.

It was possible that it was being used in some way, just not showing up in the guide data that we look at. That has now changed.

It may also be possible that while it's now more visible to us, it might not be planned for regular linear HD, it's unclear at this time. Typically the "DTV" channels have been internal non-public channels, but I have seen situations where "DTV" channels turn into real channels, that happened with the SD channels on D12 (earlier in this thread).

It's also possible that they could add a 6th HD channel to the existing transponders, as they've recently done when they added TruTV HD and E!, but that may need to be balanced with the significant expense required and quarterly budgets.

PIt's also possible that they could add a 6th HD channel to the existing transponders, as they've recently done when they added TruTV HD and E!, but that may need to be balanced with the significant expense required and quarterly budgets.

What makes up this "significant expense required" that you speak of? Do the encoders really cost tens of thousands of dollars each to upgrade?

Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. -- JFK

Because its such a specialized industry the suppliers who make the encoders and equipment milk multiple system operators for every last penny they can. They feel it's justified because they use this equipment to make money.

In any specialized industry who's bottom line is to make money, and have a core system or specialized application, you are at the mercy of the vendor. Basically if you make money with the software or hardware or it improves operational efficiencies that eventually improve your bottom line, these companies take advantage of it.

Sometimes the hardware itself costs a boat load of money but then they nickel and dime you in licensing fees for every single option or configuration. Add to it annual support contracts (premium or on site support) / service level agreements (hour or next day replacement) and it gets to be very costly.

There seems to be a lot of nebulous generalizations flying around in support of DIRECTV's slow advance into six HD channels/transponder. Does anyone have a dollar (or Euro) figure?

The other guys seem to have been multiplexing up to eight HD channels into 67% of the gross bandwidth for a while now so I'm sure the technology has been there for a while to multiplex 6 or more HD streams.

In response to the vertical market arguments, I don't think it is reasonable to assume that DIRECTV and DISH are the only organizations on the planet that are multiplexing HD satellite feeds.

Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. -- JFK

The other guys seem to have been multiplexing up to eight HD channels into 67% of the gross bandwidth for a while now so I'm sure the technology has been there for a while to multiplex 6 or more HD streams.

The other guys were pushed into it a little faster by the lack of transponder space to stay at less channels per transponder. Regardless of the age of technology each encoder costs money ... and one can count on one hand the number of companies trying to multiplex multiple HD streams on dozens of transponders. At the level DBS providers are doing it, you could probably count it on two thumbs (think of all the HD local feeds - something that most companies don't have to deal with).

Most companies who would need a multiplexer at all would need one ... and one as a backup. Some would need a second or third multiplexer and perhaps a shared backup. DBS companies would be the largest market needing multiplexers for every transponder on every satellite (including spot beams). But even with the high demand of DBS providers we are only talking about a marketplace for a thousand HD encoders. Maybe a couple thousand, but certainly not a huge marketplace.

We are practically talking about individually built devices ... not cheap mass production runs of 10s of thousands or millions. And to get it right with industrial quality it is expensive. $100k each isn't out of the ballpark for such a complicated device.

Hopefully that answers your question about the scope and costs of the encoders ... and we can get back to watching the skies for any changes to DirecTV's HD transponders - the purpose of this thread.

There seems to be a lot of nebulous generalizations flying around in support of DIRECTV's slow advance into six HD channels/transponder. Does anyone have a dollar (or Euro) figure?

I would imagine, that since there is only 2 DBS satellite providers, operating about 10 or so satellites between the two, that any equipment made specifically for their operations, is not a mass produced piece you can order at any online electronica outlet, but custom built, custom ordered to the exact specifications DirecTV needs. It is very possible that current equipment needs to be replaced, or re-customized to make this happen.

Of course no one has a dollar figure, since when do companies like DirecTV disclose what they pay for things? But you can bet that since it is all proprietary, custom built, it is going to be WAY beyond you might think it cost, and then double that.

[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

Of course no one has a dollar figure, since when do companies like DirecTV disclose what they pay for things?

Disclosure would be the problem. Those that know the exact cost can't say. Those that have a better idea of such equipment understand how expensive such a device must be.

Don't forget the rest of the world, there is more then just DIRECTV and Dish out there needing hardware like this.

There are other countries using MPEG4 and HD but even worldwide I'd put DISH and DirecTV at the top of the need list. What other country has to deal with a thousand (more or less) HD local channels? Some day everything available in HD will be carried in HD. Getting there isn't cheap.

Alsp The entire world does not use the same standards for television or HD - which tends to separate the technology. What works there may not translate.